| |
| Quantum Mechanics |  As a hot vortex cools, gravitational influence permits matter to move instinctively towards it: As the first particles of matter reach the final destination, it commences a slow fusion ignition: Atomic reaction occurs - and solar systems gravity is quickly returned to galaxies.
And its this process which brings about a high, elementary level of rotation, and once again the basic system of spin is reintroduced. Once that happens, we could imagine, with an early eruption of stellar material, matter from a central iron core would have literally showered the emerging solar-system to such an extent, that although an initial reaction once again gets under way, contributory matter gases still blankets the ambient area as far out as the peripheral walls. And perhaps father beyond that, deeper towards space.
And so, we have to ask, have we reinvented the Star?
And say, we most certainly have. What we actually did was turn a theory of stellar, globular fusion into a burning vortex: What we might like to term, a fused black hole, for easier identification.
The reason why we did this, was basically to create a solid, evolutionary solar-system: A solar system built by design rather than luck or chance. And we could facilitate explanatory matters still further, by describing its rudimentary mechanics as an entity that purveys a style which: Heats up, cools down, heats up, cools down, continuously until the solar-system has nothing left to burn - and simply dies.
This constant repetitive process, gives it an ability to control all gravity, and ensure we do not just clump together large particle matter within the solar-system, yet still leave an ambit for a quantum principle in moulding planetary evolution.
We do that with a simple carbonisation principle of quantum mechanics: Small particles controlled through a large gravitational influence. But we will decipher that in finer detail in our next chapter, planetary evolution. For now I wish to continue with the standardisation of solar-systems and promote the vortecies theory still further.
Some people might argue at this juncture, that we can see our star not a vortex, because it sits high in the sky, not too often in the UK, but it is there, apparent for all to see. So let me just emphasize, seeing is not always believing.
We have ran a quote through this book so far, and will not forsake it now. The quote, by George Bernard Shaw, suggested we have 'lost the power of wisdom through knowledge', and as I said before, and to reiterate, I am firmly of the same opinion.
To understand this more, we will indulge a touch of thought recognition. Imagine walking through the desert, you are dying of thirst, and into sight comes an oasis. You rush forwards desperately looking to bathe in the cool desert water, lie under a palm and wait your rescue. But as you rush headlong forwards, falling and rolling through the sand, the image evaporates. And all that lies ahead of you is more harsh, unforgiving sand. A cruel trick? Nature's revenge? I doubt it. Most would say it was only a mirage, and at that point be quite right. But what caused it?
A mirage is created when you get a combination of hot and cold gases meet. Hot gas rises faster than cold gas, and an illusion is created. Back to the star. Imagine now, a hot burning vortex pulling down on cold space; should we not assume, like the cruel desert trick, this would cause the centre of the vortex to rise, to create a large dome corona, and simply fool us into believing it a globular ball of gas!
The reason behind this theory is a simple one; we either look to a way where our solar-system creates its planets, or rely more safely on a scientific evaluation: "We were in the right place at the right time!" To me that does not sound very scientific, and besides, it's not as simple as that. Because we do not detect planets with a Doppler measurement around other stars, it doesn't mean we were in the right place at the right time, what you might term lucky.
Anthology forward one page back one page
|
|
| |
|
» 
